ASIAN

PARLIAMENTARY
DEBATE
• Debate is a venue of reasoned discussion from two opposing sides
on a well-defined context, where parties deliver their arguments
in an organized fashion with the primary purpose of convincing
and persuading the parliament or the audience to give merit on
the contention of their cause.
• It is an educated exercise where parties outline their
arguments and offer dynamism by contributing and
responding to the different issues raised by each side.
• Debate is tool for advocating a defined view of a
particular issue with the intent of providing the relevant
information and supporting details that will convince the
listener to support their view.
In order to have a debate, the following must be
present:

1. Topic- the subject to be discussed and debated upon.

2. Format- the certain type of debate rule that will govern
the conduct and proceedings of the debate.
3. Opposing teams- they will either support or negate the
topic to be debated upon.
4. Arguments- the substance which both sides will present.

5. Venue- place to be debated upon.

6. Audience- the people who will witness and assess the

issues of the debate.
Debate must have the following characteristics:

1. Informative- a good debate presents complete information

and factual setting. Debate is supposed to inform the public of
what they should know, to educate the people, and to help them
reach a logical understanding of the facts.
• Debaters should feed the audience the necessary facts and
evidence to will properly aid the latter in learning, grasping
and appreciating the novelty of the motion.
• Debaters should not rely merely on their own opinions but
on the general principles laid down by the authorities and
experts.
2. Well-reasoned- arguments raised in a debate must be
logical, relevant, competent and well explained.
• Arguments must show a direct link on the motion that is
debated upon. Arguments must support the core that will aid
the team prove their claims.
• Arguments raised must be acceptable to an average
reasonable person who has an average analysis of the issues
presented.
• All questions that will lead to the conclusion of the debate
must be clarified, answered, and analyzed. Debaters should
make all their points clear and understandable.
3. Persuasive- Debate should give emphasis and force to strong
arguments that need the support of the people. In order to
convince the people in the position that debaters are supporting,
debaters must be firy in presenting their issues.
• Debaters should build rapport with their audience and help them
follow the points raised by the debaters.
4. Orderly- A debate must follow a certain format that will
govern the proceeding of the debate and the conduct of the
debaters. The rules should among others set the task of each
speaker and the time limit all noted to each of them.
Speeches must be organized, structured and presented in a
methodological form.
5. Dynamic- Since in a debate, two teams present opposing
views, said views must be responded to by both teams
respectively.
• All important points must be questioned and answered by each
team and teams must directly clash with the points raised by
their opponent.
• Each speaker must contribute and respond to the requirements
and necessities of the debate.
What is a Case? Motion?
• This is the word you will hear thrown around most often in
debating. A case is the motion that the government team has
put forward for debate. The case will define the topic of
debate, it's place and time and the actors involved.
• The government has a responsibility to
define all of these things (known as 'defining
the debate') as clearly as possible. A case can
be a moral judgement or a detailed plan, or
somewhere in between.
• An example of a moral judgment or
'principled' case is: Be it resolved that
(BIRT) this House believes that pre-emtpive
war is wrong. An example of a plan or
'model' case is: BIRT the United States
should ratify the Kyoto Protocol.
• You can see that the plan case calls for a specific course of
action, whereas the principled case merely takes an ethical
stance on one side or another of a particular issue. Both
types of cases are equally valid.
Open and Closed Motions

As a matter of formal parliamentary procedure, there must

always be an 'official' motion before the house. At a
tournament, the tournament director (TD) will give the
debaters the motion for each round of debate. These motions
can be open or closed. This will be announced before the
debate begins. Most tournaments will use only one or the
other type of motion, although some tournaments will mix
and match.
• A closed motion (also known as a 'straight' or 'tight-link'
motion) is one where the government team must use the
motion given as the basis for it's case. Sometimes the motion
will be very narrow, and the government team will have
nothing to do but come up with arguments. For example:
BIRT Canada should completely ban the sale and
manufacture and consumption of cigarettes. There is no
margin for maneuvre here at all. However, other times the
motion will be less strictly defined, and the government team
will have some latitude as to how it interprets it. For
example: BIRT The world should intervene in the Sudan.
• Here, the government team will have to explain what it
means by 'world' and 'intervene'. Does 'world' mean the UN,
or Nato, or the African Union, or the EU? Does 'intervene'
mean invasion, diplomatic sanctions, economic sanctions,
etc. An open motion (also known as a 'squirrellable' motion)
is one where the TD is merely respecting the formalities of
parliamentary debate, but intends to leave it up entirely to
the government team what the debate shall be about.
• They are usually silly, or will follow some theme for the
tournament. For example: This House would dance with the
devil by the pale moonlight. With an open motion, the
government team is expected to provide its own case for
debate. These cases will usually be prepared beforehand.
• Making valid arguments is the basic skill of debating.
Without this ability the best you will be is a stylistically
wonderful bag of hot air. An argument should contain
the three elements below– then it will be a SEXI
argument.
• Motions debated in international and local debate
competitions are rooted on issues and topics that
currently controversial and debated upon.
• These topics may relate to a policy that is to be
implemented by a certain country or a situation that
is viewed differently in the international
community.

• These topics are socially relevant to all whether

directly or indirectly.
• These topics when debated upon are worded in the form of a
motion. Motions are worded in different forms. The
following are the types of motions:

1. Positive motion- this motion is worded in a manner that a

positive act must be done, or that a certain situation must be
assessed as true.
examples:

a. This House believes that we should trade with Myanmar.

b. This House believes that democracy in Iraq succeeds.
2. Negative motion- a motion proposing that something
must not be done, or that which describes the situation
negatively or as false.

examples:

a. This will not negotiate with the terrorist

b. THBT that Islam has had a bad press.
3. Abstract motion - a motion wherein the subject is not
apparent in its meaning.

example:

a. THTB we should plant cabbages rather than roses.

4. Direct motion - the motion is worded wherein the subject
and issue is clear.

example:

a. THBT EU should sanction Russia for using energy as a tool

for blackmail.
5. Value judgment - a motion wherein a certain situation,
person, or place is assessed. It calls for the measuring of a
certain act whether it is good or bad. True or false.

example:

a. THBT conditional economic aid is futile.

6. Policy motion - a motion which porses that something
must be done or undone. That should be supported or not. It
calls for an action.

example:

a. This House would use racial profiling in the war against

terror.
7. Local motion - a motion that concerns only issues of
national interest.

example:

a. That people power is nothing but the revolution of the

rich.
8. International motion - a motion which is a global
concern.

example:

a. That globalization defeats its own purpose.

9. Subjective motions - political, civil society, human rights,
powers of the state, international diplomacy, religion, science
and technology, economics, international policies,
environment, etc.

examples:

a. This would prosecute extrajudicial killings.

b. That Vatican upholds religious conquest and not religious
conversion.
c. That spy satellite is the way to go.
d. This house would grant amnesty to war crimes offenders.
State your point:
What is it that you are trying to say? Make it clear and brief.

"Prostitutes will be safer in legal licensed brothels.“

Explain your point:

Why do you think this? What is the basis for your statement?

"This is because it will be easier to arrest anyone assaulting them

if the police know where they are and prostitutes feel more
comfortable contacting the police.“

Illustrate your point:

Give an example or analogy which backs up your point.

"In Germany, where prostitution is legal, the number of

prostitutes assaulted by their clients has fallen."
Assertions and Assumptions vs. Arguments

One of the most common accusations that your

opponents will throw at you is that you are merely
asserting something rather than arguing it. The difference
between the two is fairly easy to understand. Imagine
that, instead of going through the steps of point,
argument, evidence, I merely stated my point and left it
at that. That is called an assertion: when one simply
asserts the truth of a statement, without bothering to
provide evidence of its truth. It is inevitable that at some
point, some things will be assertions, because you are
limited in the time you have to support your arguments
and your means of providing evidence.
• Every single case, and every single argument, no
matter how good a debater the person who built it is,
will be full of assertions and assumptions. So the best
advice I can give a new debater is: look for the
assumptions. That is your best and simplest strategy for
undermining your opponents' logic.
 Asian Parliamentary Style
There are 2 teams:
1. Government- proposes and defends the motion.
2. Opposition- refute and negates the motion.
 Each team has 3 members and each team gives 4
speeches.
 Limited preparation format
- the topic is announced, depending on the
tournament, roughly 30 minutes before the
debate.
The 3 members of the Government should defend the
motion.
The 3 members of the team, each of which gives a 7
minute speech, are:
1) Prime Minister (PM)
2) Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)
3) Government Whip (GW)
• One speaker from the Government team - either the
Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister - is charged
with giving a 5 minutes reply speech that clarifies the
debate from the Government perspective without
bringing forth new arguments.
Reply Speech:

Reply speech is a comparative analysis of the strength and

weaknesses of the case of both sides. The aim of the speech is
to give a bias judgment as to why should the people support
the team's claim. The speech is first delivered by the
opposition side and followed by the government side who
will close the debate.
The 3 members of the Opposition team should negate
the motion and refute arguments brought forth by the
Government.
The 3 members of the team, each of which gives a 7
minute speech, are:
1) Leader of Opposition (LO)
2) Deputy Leader of Opposition (DLO)
3) Opposition Whip (OW)
Matter, Manner, Method:
Asian Parliamentary Debate is assessed by
an Adjudicator Panel composed of an odd
number according to the following criteria:
1. Matter (40)- substance of the debate, the
arguments and evidence presented, and
the logical reasoning and presentation of
said arguments.
2. Manner (40)- the style of delivery, the persuasion skills,
and the conduct of the debaters.

3. Method (20)- the response to the dynamics of the debate,

and the observance of the rules of debate.
The Members of the government side are the following:

1. Prime minister (PM)- opens the debate, defines the motion

and advances arguments;
2. Deputy prime Minister(DPM)- refute at first instance the
case of the opposition, re-establish the government's claim,
and advances arguments;
3. Government whip(GW)- makes an issue-based rebuttal of
the opposition's case and summarizes the case of the
government.
The Members of the Opposition side are
the following:
1. Leader of the Opposition(LO)-
responds directly to the case of the
government by giving a direct clash, and
advances arguments. May challenge the
motion if the definition is challengeable;
• 2. Deputy Leader of the Opposition(DPL)- refutes the case of
the DPM, reestablishes the case of the opposition, and
advances an argument;
3. Opposition Whip (OW)- makes an issues-based rebuttal of
the government's and summarizes the case of the opposition.
• Prime Minister:

1. What is the motion all about? (Simplify it)

2. Give the background of the debate. State the
problem.
3. Define the issues.
4. Give a Model: Mechanism/Standards.
5. Give the outline of your arguments
6. Discuss arguments 1 by 1
7. Summarize your points by reiterating your outline.
8. Throw a burden
• Leader of the Opposition

1. Overview, try to recontextualise the debate.

2. Rebut: bash the model; attack substantive case.
Sometimes a counter-model will be introduced.

Sample Rebuttal:

“Will taxing church property solve the budget deficit?

No – for two reasons ...”

3. Give the outline of your arguments

a. Discuss arguments 1 by 1
b. Summarize your points by reiterating your outline.

4. Throw a burden
• Deputies

1. Give a brief rebuttal (integrate rebuilding of arguments)

2. Give the outline of your arguments
3. Discuss arguments 1 by 1
4. Summarize your points by reiterating your outline.
5. Throw a burden
Whips

1. Lay down the issues in the debate

2. Discuss each issue by:
a. presenting the analysis of the opponent on said issue
b. Rebut their analysis (by using the case presented by your
team or by giving supplements)
Reply

1. Why should you win the debate?

Criteria:
a. Greater contribution to the debate.
b. Responsiveness to the motion and the issues presented.

2. Comparative analysis:
a. How your team had advantage over the other?
b. What is the problem with the case of the opponent? (Causal
links, Assertions, Contradictions)
What is a “good” definition?
• A definition that is in the spirit of the motion and clearly
explains the contention of the debate.
• Definitely not a definition that wins the debate, as that
means no debate occurs.
Can team parameterize definitions?

• Yes. Teams are allowed to set parameters to limit the

grounds of the debate, as long as those parameters are fair.
Do you have to include every word in the motion
during the definition?

• You do not have to define every word, but the words in the
motion define the potential scope of the debate and the onus
of the teams.
On what basis can you challenge a definition?
• A definition can be challenged on the basis that a definition
is: (take definitions from rules)
a) time set/place set
b) truistic/tautological
c) wholly unreasonable/squirrel
Who can challenge and who can’t?

• Any team in the debate can challenge the definition, because

each team is a unique entity. Thus, a debate could have 4
definitions.
What happens during a definition debate?
• To challenge the definition, one has to
a) explicitly state that you are challenging the definition
b) state why (time or place set, truistic, unreasonable) and
explain
c) provide a new definition
• You still maintain your positions in the debate and have to
argue appropriately. Thus the Opening Opposition, after
challenging the definition and providing a new one would then
proceed to oppose the motion, not support it.

Once you challenge a definition, other than to show why the

previous definition is inaccurate, you do not have to address
the issues/arguments that fall under it. One basically ignores
that definition.
Matter & Manner
What is good matter?
Good matter is matter that is logically developed,
relevant to the case at hand and substantiated.
What is good manner?
Good manner is manner that is effective in
strengthening the argument/case, is entertaining.
Which is more important?

They are both equally important (check section on scoring).

Thus a team could win on manner just as easily as a team
could win on matter.
Scoring

Matter Manner Total Range

25-30 25-30 50-59 poor
30-35 30-35 60-69 below average
35-40 35-40 70-79 average
40-45 40-45 80-89 break worthy
good (semi-
45-50 45-50 90-100
finals level)
What part do POIs play in a debate?

• To give and take Points of Information is the role of every

speaker. Not doing either is failing to fulfill your role. POIs
contribute matter to the debate, and the way in which they are
given or taken is a reflection of manner.
• Thus not taking any POIs means a failure to fulfill your role
and potentially lower contribution in matter (however that
does not mean an automatic last place).
How long should POIs be?
• POIs are not a place to make an argument, just a point, an
example, an accusation or to ask a question.
• Typically Points Of Information are about 2 sentences long or
15 seconds in length. If a POI is too long, it eats into the time
allocated for the speaker and the adjudicator may call order
and request the person asking the POI to quit.
How many must I take?
• It is recommended that each speaker takes 2 points of
information, 1 from the opening team and another from the
closing team. This is fairest and most optimum for
interactivity in the debate.
Elimination Rounds:

Round 1: Gender

· THBT gay rights movements should compel openly gay

celebrities to actively support their causes
· THBT feminist politics must transition from the halls of
Congress to the bedroom
· THBT Muslim universities should grant professional
subsidies to feminist scholars living in radically conservative
Muslim states.
• Round 3: Culpability

· THBT sober passengers of a drunk driver should be held

criminally liable
· THW punish bystanders of a crime
· THW allow witnesses of gruesome murders to claim
emotional damages against the criminal
• Round 4: Environment

· TH celebrates the use of emotional blackmail as part of

environmental strategies
· THBT Earth Hour is a meaningless, faddish, exercise
· THW make waste-disposal a mandatory requirement for
free trade agreements
• Round 5: Print Media

· THBT print media is dead

· THW ban government officials from obtaining board
positions in print media
· THW require print media to grant criticized individuals
compulsory reply space
• Round 6: Pop Culture

· THW remove the foreign films category in the

Academy Awards
· TH regrets the rise of vegetarianism
· THW shut down the World Wrestling Entertainment for
good
• Round 7: Geopolitics

· THBT China should revise its amoral foreign policy by

sanctioning North Korea
· TH regrets Obama’s stance of reducing investments
for foreign policy initiatives
· THBT it’s time to grant statehood to Taiwan
• Quarterfinals: Rights

· THW lift the moratorium on blood donations for men

who have sex with men
· THBT parents who are minors should be allowed to
retain custody of their offspring
· TH supports the preferential disclosure of sexual
harassment issues to religious leaders over state
authorities within some religious communities
• Finals: Education

· TH celebrates the rise of political activism among

students in public universities
· THW accommodate student-teacher relationships
among consenting adults in universities
· THB in mandatory sex education in all religious schools
• Final : That this house would allow abortion at all stages of
pregnancy

Semi Final: This house believes governments should subsidise private

home ownership.

Qtr Final: This house believes that the international criminal court
should prosecute crimes against the democratic process.

Octo Final: This house would arm local militia to fight the taliban in
Afghanistan.

ESL Final: This house would implement quotas for domestic players in
national football leagues.

EFL Final: This house would prohibit all private health care.

Round 9: This house would ban the publication of political opinion

polls.
• Round 8: This house would apply a lower rate of income tax to
women.
Round 7: This house believes that the west should recognise the
independence of Abkhazia.
Round 6: This house would criminalise adultery.
Round 5: This house believes that China and India should bear
the same obligations as the West in fighting climate change
Round 4: This house would force the religious desegregation of
Northern Irish schools.
Round 3: This house would allow soldiers to sue their
government for negligence.
Round 2: This house would fire the senior managements of all
corporations which receive government bailouts.
Round 1: This house would ban all forms of gambling.
Womens Debate: This house would ban all forms of religious
gender discrimination.
“Debaters are not born,
they are made.”